Dao De Jing, chapter 1
Monday, 18 April 2022 11:57![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lnhammer[Yes, really. I know, I know. Done while recovering from Covid. DON’T JUDGE ME.]
A way that can be described is not the constant Way.
A name that can be named is not the constant Name.
That without name is the origin of heaven and earth;
That with a name is the mother of the ten thousand things.
Thus, those constantly without desires see its mysteries;
Those constantly with desires see [only] its edges.
These two things, going forth the same yet having different names, together are meaning’s Mystery.
The Mystery’s most mysterious [part] is the gate to all subtlety.
道可道，非常道。
名可名，非常名。
无名天地之始；
有名万物之母。
故常无欲，以观其妙；
常有欲，以观其徼。
此两者，同出而异名，同谓之玄。
玄之又玄，衆妙之门。
Can we start with the problem of the title? Two nouns, such as dào = way/path plus dé = virtue/power, placed together without an explicit particle or conjunction can be read multiple ways: dào and dé, dào and its dé, the dào’s dé. The text is in two sections, and it’s traditional to read one as more about dào and the other more about dé, and thus understand the title as an ‘and’ thing, but the sections aren’t actually titled and that “more about” requires squinting to see. Given the way the book as a whole seeks to subvert dualisms (even while relying on parallel prose), I’m inclined to call it “The Classic of the Virtue/Power of the Way/Path,” but I’m barely even an amateur at this.
And then there’s the text: the base text I nabbed (chosen because readily available and too sick to search for better) is a 3rd century CE copy that’s been the standard version for millennia, one that shaved off every technically omittable grammatical particle and cupola from a mystical (i.e. already hard-to-understand) text. IOW, it’s rilly difficult to read, let alone grasp. We know particles were dropped because in 1971 another text based on a version at least 400 years older was found in a tomb, which has them (plus numerous other verbal changes, though only two of significance for this passage). If I can find an online version of that older text, I may switch to that.
Anyway, as far as commentary, there’s so many ambiguities and interpretations in this, I can’t even.
Except, well, this one: when as in the first clause dào is a verb, it can mean either “to go along a path” in both physical or metaphoric senses or “to describe/recount,” so it could be either can be described or can be taken. (FWIW, describe is the more common sense.)
—L.
A way that can be described is not the constant Way.
A name that can be named is not the constant Name.
That without name is the origin of heaven and earth;
That with a name is the mother of the ten thousand things.
Thus, those constantly without desires see its mysteries;
Those constantly with desires see [only] its edges.
These two things, going forth the same yet having different names, together are meaning’s Mystery.
The Mystery’s most mysterious [part] is the gate to all subtlety.
道可道，非常道。
名可名，非常名。
无名天地之始；
有名万物之母。
故常无欲，以观其妙；
常有欲，以观其徼。
此两者，同出而异名，同谓之玄。
玄之又玄，衆妙之门。
Can we start with the problem of the title? Two nouns, such as dào = way/path plus dé = virtue/power, placed together without an explicit particle or conjunction can be read multiple ways: dào and dé, dào and its dé, the dào’s dé. The text is in two sections, and it’s traditional to read one as more about dào and the other more about dé, and thus understand the title as an ‘and’ thing, but the sections aren’t actually titled and that “more about” requires squinting to see. Given the way the book as a whole seeks to subvert dualisms (even while relying on parallel prose), I’m inclined to call it “The Classic of the Virtue/Power of the Way/Path,” but I’m barely even an amateur at this.
And then there’s the text: the base text I nabbed (chosen because readily available and too sick to search for better) is a 3rd century CE copy that’s been the standard version for millennia, one that shaved off every technically omittable grammatical particle and cupola from a mystical (i.e. already hard-to-understand) text. IOW, it’s rilly difficult to read, let alone grasp. We know particles were dropped because in 1971 another text based on a version at least 400 years older was found in a tomb, which has them (plus numerous other verbal changes, though only two of significance for this passage). If I can find an online version of that older text, I may switch to that.
Anyway, as far as commentary, there’s so many ambiguities and interpretations in this, I can’t even.
Except, well, this one: when as in the first clause dào is a verb, it can mean either “to go along a path” in both physical or metaphoric senses or “to describe/recount,” so it could be either can be described or can be taken. (FWIW, describe is the more common sense.)
—L.
no subject
Date: 19 April 2022 03:08 (UTC)no subject
Date: 19 April 2022 16:33 (UTC)